Berlin flak towers
Flakturms at the west end of Tiergarten. These six-storied buildings could accomodate 8 thousand people(according to a report, 30 thousand people seeked their haven in one of these Flakturms during an allied air raid)
Photographed on January 22, 1941
Photographed on January 22, 1941
- Attachments
-
- FLAK Towers.jpg (42.97 KiB) Viewed 3367 times
Hi Killchola
Are you sure about the date of the very nice photo.
The start of the building of the Flakturm at Tiergarten
was in Oktober 1940 and took 6 months when it was ready
in March 1941. ( Flaktürme from H. Sakkers )
Also the Würzburg Reise on the Leitturm was placed in the
spring of 1941 ( Die Deutschen Funkmessverfahren der Deutschen
Luftwaffe from F.Trenkle ), so I thinks the photo is taken later than
22 jan. 1941.
Regards Jos
Are you sure about the date of the very nice photo.
The start of the building of the Flakturm at Tiergarten
was in Oktober 1940 and took 6 months when it was ready
in March 1941. ( Flaktürme from H. Sakkers )
Also the Würzburg Reise on the Leitturm was placed in the
spring of 1941 ( Die Deutschen Funkmessverfahren der Deutschen
Luftwaffe from F.Trenkle ), so I thinks the photo is taken later than
22 jan. 1941.
Regards Jos
- medieval dudes
- Member
- Posts: 361
- Joined: 10 Feb 2005, 14:50
- Location: Ottawa, Canada
More disadvantages then advantages
Hello flack operators
Well I have ask this: of what use where these towers in the end:
-They cost a large amount of ressources to produce
-They were standing high and therefor where "easier targets" for low flying bombers
-They were extremely large and were easy to see from the air
-One good aim from a bomber at it could destroy a bunch of its guns (since they were so close together)
I just have to ask why the Germans were not more interested in having multiple small AA positions instead of having these massive structures?
I really think the picture on the thread are nice to look at. Thanks for sharing guys
Greg
Well I have ask this: of what use where these towers in the end:
-They cost a large amount of ressources to produce
-They were standing high and therefor where "easier targets" for low flying bombers
-They were extremely large and were easy to see from the air
-One good aim from a bomber at it could destroy a bunch of its guns (since they were so close together)
I just have to ask why the Germans were not more interested in having multiple small AA positions instead of having these massive structures?
I really think the picture on the thread are nice to look at. Thanks for sharing guys
Greg
Hello Greg
It seems that all though the massive bombings of Berlin, Hanburg and Vienna - none of the towers were ever seriously hit and damaged !!!
You have to realize, that at night ( the bombraids were mostly at night ) it would not be easy to spot them, allthough they were known to the allied airforce, and the flak were also very intence in these particular areas.
The Berlin towers were more damaged by soviet artillery in april may 45 than they were by bombing and attack from the air. The flakunits were, beside the flaktowers, very massive represented in other flakpositions around and in the cities, so they had a lot of other "flak" present also !!
But aside from that, your points are very right, and there were planned more towers in other cities, but they were never realized, so the germans had also made a "cost - benefit" calculation - and decided to cancel them.
Regards
Kurt
kstdk.
It seems that all though the massive bombings of Berlin, Hanburg and Vienna - none of the towers were ever seriously hit and damaged !!!
You have to realize, that at night ( the bombraids were mostly at night ) it would not be easy to spot them, allthough they were known to the allied airforce, and the flak were also very intence in these particular areas.
The Berlin towers were more damaged by soviet artillery in april may 45 than they were by bombing and attack from the air. The flakunits were, beside the flaktowers, very massive represented in other flakpositions around and in the cities, so they had a lot of other "flak" present also !!
But aside from that, your points are very right, and there were planned more towers in other cities, but they were never realized, so the germans had also made a "cost - benefit" calculation - and decided to cancel them.
Regards
Kurt
kstdk.
-
- Member
- Posts: 1051
- Joined: 14 Jul 2005, 16:38
- Location: netherlands
IIRC the Humboldthain G-turm - along with the relatively deep RR cut - was an anchor point of the inner defense ring during the battle of Berlin. The surviving north face of the tower still bears the marks of numerous 20.3 cm and 15.2 cm hits. My photos are not the best but you can make out some of the exisitng damage.
Also there are remnants of the L-turm on the south side of the park right across the street from the former AEG werke.
Also there are remnants of the L-turm on the south side of the park right across the street from the former AEG werke.
- Attachments
-
- artdamage1.jpg (130.63 KiB) Viewed 3232 times
- medieval dudes
- Member
- Posts: 361
- Joined: 10 Feb 2005, 14:50
- Location: Ottawa, Canada
Thanks for the answer Kurt .kstdk wrote:Hello Greg
It seems that all though the massive bombings of Berlin, Hanburg and Vienna - none of the towers were ever seriously hit and damaged !!!
You have to realize, that at night ( the bombraids were mostly at night ) it would not be easy to spot them, allthough they were known to the allied airforce, and the flak were also very intence in these particular areas.
The Berlin towers were more damaged by soviet artillery in april may 45 than they were by bombing and attack from the air. The flakunits were, beside the flaktowers, very massive represented in other flakpositions around and in the cities, so they had a lot of other "flak" present also !!
But aside from that, your points are very right, and there were planned more towers in other cities, but they were never realized, so the germans had also made a "cost - benefit" calculation - and decided to cancel them.
Regards
Kurt
kstdk.
Yep I understand your point what intriges me now is that you mentioned that the Allies knew about the towers. And earlier on it was indicated that some (even though their capacity was 8000) were filled with 30 000 people. If we add all this info together as an Ally bomber that wants to demoralize the population with terror and death I would simply just pound as much as I can the towers. 30 000 people killed in a go. Well to me these towers seem so dam dangerous. An accumulation of people in one small area... could have been a disaster. Good thing nothing happened.
Also I know this is off topic to a certain extent but I am intriged with some of the pictures I see... The 128 mm Zwilling I had no idea it was acutally produced. When where they placed on the towers and does anyone know how many were produced in total???? Thanks again in advance
Gregory
The first twin gun was installed in Berlin in 1942, at the end of the war 34 guns had been mounted in Flak towers.When where they placed on the towers and does anyone know how many were produced in total????
Production of sinmgle barreled guns must have been higher, but I haven`t heard any numbers for those.....
EE
- medieval dudes
- Member
- Posts: 361
- Joined: 10 Feb 2005, 14:50
- Location: Ottawa, Canada
450 or more
Good morning comradesErik E wrote:The first twin gun was installed in Berlin in 1942, at the end of the war 34 guns had been mounted in Flak towers.When where they placed on the towers and does anyone know how many were produced in total????
Production of sinmgle barreled guns must have been higher, but I haven`t heard any numbers for those.....
EE
Thanks Eric. 34 is a good number for such heavy machines 8). I discovered that the single barreled production reached more then 450 machines. Also that the first guns to shoot at Russian troops as they attacked and entered the city were the Flack guns of the towers. So that is confirmed now.
Source: http://users.belgacom.net/artillery/art ... tml#232141
Also, the picture you posted PJF... impressive to see that the damage done does not seem to be so great for such large callibers of artillery guns (you mentioned 20,3 cm guns). The structure must have been quite resistant.
Gregory
Try this:K-9 wrote:I've searched the net for any more informations about the Flak Towers, and all I came up were pictures. As an student-architect, I would be interested to see some blueprints of them, floorplans, sections and so on... Does anyone have such blueprints? . Thanks.
http://www.google.dk/search?hl=da&q=Fla ... %B8g&meta=
bregds
SES